It is Wednesday, November 17, 1993. Okay, now we've heard the tape, the real 'confession' tape in which Dr. Oziel recorded part of an actual session with the boys, with their cooperation, on 12/11/89. This is supposedly the most damaging evidence against them but, in my own mind, the way things have been developed over the past four months, it only served to strengthen their defense! True, they never directly mentioned self defense or abuse on the tape, but it could be construed (and was construed by Ms. Abramson and Dr. Burgess) that there were many allusions to both...The taped session was very unprofessional and non-therapeutic and it is clear to me that Oziel was trying to provoke them into saying incriminating things. On June 28, 1993 Hazel Thornton showed up for the first day of jury selection. She didn't know she would spend the next seven months as a juror on one of the year's most high-profile murder trials: The People v. Erik Menendez. Erik Menendez and his brother Lyle were on trial for shot-gunning their parents to death in their Beverly Hills home.Hazel Thornton began keeping her journal as a way of getting the trial out of her system every day, so she could sleep at night without being haunted by the day's testimony. And, sworn to shoulder the burden of silence, she also used the journal to help sort out the barrage of details. A behind the scenes witness, Thornton describes with lucidity, charm, and humor the day-to-day experiences of a juror: the riveting emotional testimonies, the deluge of minutiae, and the unpleasant graphic evidence. Going far beyond the reportage of the print or electronic media, her diary gets inside the thoughts, discussions, and actions of the jury, and the trial process itself. She writes about the jury's deliberations, and eventual dead-lock, with revelatory insight into what really happens on a 'hung jury'. Author note: Hazel Thornton is a senior Engineer at Pacific Bell in Pasadena, California. Lawrence S. Wrightsman is Professor of Psychology at the University of Kansas. Amy J. Posey holds a M.A. in Social Psychology from the University of Kansas. Alan W. Scheflin is Professor of Law at Santa Clara University Law School.

Sprache:

Englisch

Verlagsort:

Philadelphia PA

|

USA

Zielgruppe:

Für Beruf und Forschung

Maße:

Höhe: 230 mm

ISBN-13:

978-1-56639-394-2 (9781566393942)

ISBN-10:

1566393949 (1566393949)

Copyright in bibliographic data is held by Nielsen Book Services Limited or its licensors: all rights reserved.

"...candid entries provide readers with an insider's perspective of a controversial trial and show how the defense attorneys used a 'blame the victim' strategy..." --Booklist "A highly valuable resource for litigators, and a good read for the expanding army of trial buffs." --Kirkus Reviews "...a gripping, no holds barred account by a courageous woman who served as a juror in the nation's most notorious parricide. Every lawyer, law student, jurist, and citizen concerned with the role of juries in a democracy will be spellbound by Thornton's contemporaneous account of jurors' responses to testimony, as well as her assessment of attorney performance. She offers the shocking reasons behind the polarization of jurors and exposes male jurors' efforts to ridicule, control, and undermine female jurors. Bringing to life the intense and highly charged confrontations between jurors over their inability to set aside their prejudices and follow the law, she reveals the painful dynamics that led to a hung jury." --Scharlette Holdman, Defense Consultant "...a fascinating and revealing account of American justice in action, and the psychological and legal commentaries that follow the diary are insightful and valuable." --Monroe H. Freeman, Hofstra University Law School "In one of the nation's most closely watched cases Hazel Thornton's journal takes us where even the cameras cannot go--inside the jury room and inside one juror's thought process. We see the evidence through her eyes and view the deliberations from where she sits. Hung Jury reminds us that prejudice can influence jury verdicts. At the same time it drives home an abiding reality and strength of the jury system--that people of conscience frequently disagree about the evidence, especially when it is ambiguous. Rather than evidence of a failure, Hung Jury is an indication that the system is working." --Lois Heaney, Trial Consultant, National Jury Project/West